4.  The applicant was born in 1947 and lives in Skopje.
5.  The applicant worked as a supervisor in the technical control department in “Rudnici i Železarnica”- Skopje (“the company”).
6. On 20 April 1995 the company made the applicant redundant with effect from 28 February 1995. The notice was allegedly served on the applicant on 12 July 1995. On 20 July 1995 the applicant unsuccessfully objected to the redundancy before the managing board of the company.
7. On 15 August 1995 the applicant brought before the Skopje Court of First Instance (Основен суд Скопје) a civil action for annulment of the dismissal decision and claimed reinstatement. He alleged that between 26 January and 31 May 1995 he had been on a compulsory leave (принуден одмор) so that he could not be laid off. He also claimed that the company had failed to apply the relevant criteria.
8. Of four hearings scheduled between 17 October 1995 and 17 April 1996, one was adjourned at the applicant's request as his representative had been prevented from attending. The other hearings were adjourned as the company had failed to comply with the court's instruction to submit relevant documents in time.
9. Of five hearings fixed between 25 October 1996 and 11 March 1998, one was adjourned at the applicant's request, as his representative was absent. During this period, another panel of judges (судски совет) took over to decide the case.
10. On 11 March 1998 the Skopje Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant's claim as ill-founded. It established that the Law on Reconstruction of Loss-making Undertakings (Закон за преструктурирање на дел од претпријатијата кои во своето работење изкажуваат загуби) (“the Law”), being the lex specialis, had applied to his case and that it had suspended the application of the Labour Relationships Act (Закон за работните односи) concerning employees who had worked with a loss-making undertaking and who had been made redundant. In accordance with section 23 of the Law, an employee is considered as dismissed the day the Government approved the programme for reconstruction (Програма за преструктурирање) of the undertaking concerned. It further held that the company had been established as a loss-making undertaking by Government decision of 24 January 1995 and that the latter had approved the company's programme for reconstruction on 27 December 1994. The court dismissed the applicant's arguments that he had been dismissed contrary to the criteria set forth in collective agreements and in the relevant provisions of the Labour Relationships Act, as they had been derogated by the Law and that the dismissal decision had not been given by an authorised organ. The court accordingly found that the applicant's redundancy was lawful.
11. On 2 February 1999 the applicant appealed.
12. On 7 April 1999 the Skopje Court of Appeal (Апелационен суд) dismissed the applicant's appeal and upheld the lower court's decision. It found that the trial court had correctly established the facts and had properly applied the law. It further stated that the trial court had provided sufficient reasons for its decision and that the applicant had failed to present any evidence in his favour.
13. On 18 June 1999 the applicant lodged with the Supreme Court an appeal on points of law (ревизија) in which he reiterated his earlier complaints. On 21 March 2000 he submitted a copy of the Government's decision of 27 December 1994 as an addendum to the appeal on points of law.
14. On 21 March 2002 the Supreme Court dismissed as ill-founded the applicant's appeal on points of law. It upheld the facts as established and the reasons adduced by the lower courts. It did not address the matters to which the applicant referred in his supplement of 21 March 2000.
15. The applicant alleged that he was served with the decision on 7 June 2002. By a letter of 8 February 2005 he unsuccessfully requested the Supreme Court to provide him with a copy of the receipt slip concerning the date of service of that decision.
16. On an unspecified date in February 2003, the applicant lodged with the Court of First Instance a request to re-open the proceedings (предлог за повторување на постaпката). He referred to a Supreme Court's decision given in administrative contentious proceedings (управен спор) concerning the amount of the unemployment allowance he had been entitled to receive.
17. On 7 June 2005 the Skopje Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant's request, as the Supreme Court's decision he had referred to in his request, did not support his claim.
18. The trial court's decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 17 November 2005.
19. On 5 January 2006 the applicant lodged an appeal on points of law against the lower courts' decisions.
20. The proceedings before the Supreme Court concerning the applicant's request for re-opening of the proceedings remain pending.